09TBILISI984, GEORGIA: FM VASHADZE UNDERLINES REDLINES ON UN

To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

Discussing cablesIf you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol).Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #09TBILISI984.

C O N F I D E N T I A L TBILISI 000984
NOFORN
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/29/2019
TAGS: PRELUNSCUNOMIGRSGG
SUBJECT: GEORGIA: FM VASHADZE UNDERLINES REDLINES ON UN
MANDATE
REF: A. GEHRENBECK-EUR/CARC/DL 5-26-09 EMAIL
¶B. TBILISI 942
Classified By: Ambassador John F. Tefft for Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).
¶1. (C/NF) On May 29, Georgian Foreign Minister Vashadze
called in the Ambassador to ensure the United States
understood Georgia's redlines regarding a new UN mandate.
Referring to his May 22 letter to the Secretary, Vashadze
emphasized Georgia's absolute commitment to the following
minimum requirements: 1) the August 12, 2008 ceasefire
agreement must be the basis for a new mandate; 2) the mandate
must include an international police component; and 3) the
mandate must provide for fully demilitarized zones in Gali,
Ochamchire, and the Kodori Valley. Vashadze also insisted
the name of the mission must contain a reference to Georgia.
A mandate that did not meet these conditions -- especially a
basis in the ceasefire agreement and a continued reference to
Georgia in the name -- would be "absolutely unacceptable."
Explaining that Georgia must have security, but must also
avoid any step by the international community away from its
territorial integrity, Vashadze said that Georgia is ready to
refuse home country consent if the mandate does not include
these key elements.
¶2. (C/NF) Vashadze noted that a mandate without these
elements would present enormous problems for Georgia, both
internally and externally. In addition to the aftermath of
war, an economic crisis, massive unemployment, and a huge
loss of trade, Georgia would have moved that much farther
away from the international community's recognition of and
support for its territorial integrity. Explaining that
Georgia looks to the United States as the cornerstone of its
international suppor, Vashadze said that Georgia is not
willing to give Russia the slightest hint that it is willing
to compromise on these fundamental points.
¶3. (C/NF) In the case of the OSCE, Vashadze explained that
Georgia, as a full-fledged member with equal status as all
other members, was more able to be flexible and take
positions that avoided any blame for the defeat of the
mission. In New York, however, Georgia does not have a seat
at the main table, and so has less flexibility. He said that
if Georgia has to take on the role of blocking an
unacceptable mission, then it will. If a draft mandate that
is acceptable to Georgia goes forward, he noted two possible
scenarios: either it passes, or Russia vetoes it. If a draft
mandate goes forward that is unacceptable to Georgia,
however, Vashadze said that his country is prepared to block
it. He noted that it will be important for Russia to
understand that a no to an unacceptable mission does not
imply an acceptance of further Russian provocations, but
nevertheless, Georgia cannot compromise on the points above.
¶4. (C/NF) Vashadze expressed concern that the British and
French seem to have moved away from some of these positions.
He also expressed his disapproval of the circulation of
non-papers on a possible mandate that have not been shown to
the Georgians, noting in particular a recent German draft.
Once again, he said he looked to the United States for
support in the process.
TEFFT

The information recorded on this site has been extracted from http://Wikileaks.org (Georgia) database..

We wish to express our gratitude to Julian Assange and his team for making this data available as it is an important public record.

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:

The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.

The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.

The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.